anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
end

anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for E...

thomashammer78
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

Is there really a BIG difference in Canon's vs Kenko/Sigma/Bower brands?

besides the price difference... Canons is listed at around $420, Sigma is $240 and Bower $160 for the 2x converters

is the main thing the AF speed?

Nov 13, 2012 at 01:28 PM

jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

Here's a current thread with some comments:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1165350/0#11111906

Nov 13, 2012 at 03:15 PM

Will Patterson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

I've used them all in the past and on that lens currently and the Canon 1.4x II is still obviously sharper after looking at photos. AF speeds are about the same, but there's a dropoff with sharpness with the Kenko and Sigma TC's. I even sent the Sigma TC in to the factory to get repaired because I thought it was so bad, but the tech from Sigma who was working on it called me and said it was perfect, no adjustments necessary and sent it back to me free of charge. I sold it pretty quickly.

Nov 13, 2012 at 03:18 PM

jj_glos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

I've got a dirt cheap Kenko 2x MC4 which I've used on a 70-200 mkII. AF speed isn't too bad at all (I've only really used it for airshows where it had no problems). One thing I would say, if you're looking at using it on FF there is a weird effect around the edges of the frame. This isn't so noticeable on a crop. I haven't used any canon TC on my 70-200 mkII so nothing to compare against unfortunately.

Nov 13, 2012 at 03:25 PM

jj_glos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

See the bottom of this shot for the effect I'm referring to:

Jennie by jj_glos, on Flickr

Nov 13, 2012 at 03:34 PM

Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

Will Patterson wrote:
I've used them all in the past and on that lens currently and the Canon 1.4x II is still obviously sharper after looking at photos.

And there are those that think the Kenko are as good as the Canon, and some think it is better:

http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php

Nov 13, 2012 at 03:41 PM

faremax
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

Imagemaster wrote:
And there are those that think the Kenko are as good as the Canon, and some think it is better:

http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php

I am one of those people. I did some testing of 1.4 Kenko and Canon II before buying one and could not see any difference in IQ and sharpness. Plus Kenko fits most lenses (if not all) while Canon does not.

Nov 13, 2012 at 04:47 PM

Will Patterson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

Imagemaster wrote:
Will Patterson wrote:
I've used them all in the past and on that lens currently and the Canon 1.4x II is still obviously sharper after looking at photos.

And there are those that think the Kenko are as good as the Canon, and some think it is better:

http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php

I understand. I'm not one of those people

Nov 13, 2012 at 04:51 PM

ange
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

You might want to throw Tamron into the mix for consideration as well. From all I've read, it compares favorably to the Canon. I wasn't able to justify the extra cost, so I went with the Tamron.

I thought it was awful at first on my 70-200 f/4, so I sent it in to Tamron. Somewhat like Will mentioned with his Sigma, Tamron said the TC was perfect and that something was wrong with my Canon lens.

I thought, here we go...the run around. So I sent my lens back to Canon and sure enough, the lens was out of alignment somehow and the left side was 'ever so slightly' soft. This was hardly noticeable without a TC, but with it, the problem was greatly magnified.

Since getting the lens back, the combo works well together. Tamron was right.

Andy

Nov 13, 2012 at 05:06 PM

jj_glos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

The Tamrons are just rebadged Kenkos though aren't they?

Nov 13, 2012 at 05:15 PM

Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

ange wrote:
Tamron was right.

Andy

Canon is not always the best, and the same goes for their service.

Nov 13, 2012 at 05:15 PM

ange
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

Here's a short review/comparison page I remembered.
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tcs.html

Andy

Nov 13, 2012 at 05:19 PM

thomashammer78
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

So, you sholdnt really aim for any higher that the 1.4 from what I can gather from all of you, it ends up losing quality compared to what you actually aim to get...

in other words... get a real telelens if thats what I need

Nov 13, 2012 at 07:47 PM

Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

thomashammer78 wrote:
So, you sholdnt really aim for any higher that the 1.4 from what I can gather from all of you, it ends up losing quality compared to what you actually aim to get...

in other words... get a real telelens if thats what I need

No problem using a 2x especially on a supertele lens. IQ is still very good and for the f/2.8 lenses which end up at f/5.6 with the 2x AF is still good too, more so with the mk II superteles but from my experience also with the mk I superteles. Lenses like the 300/400 f/2.8 eat TC's for breakfast.

But I agree it should not be a full time proposition to use a 2x or even 1.4x. If this is happening you should invest in longer glass. Just don't be afraid to use TC's when needed.

Nov 13, 2012 at 09:40 PM

Tony B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

faremax wrote:
Imagemaster wrote:
And there are those that think the Kenko are as good as the Canon, and some think it is better:

http://www.traumflieger.de/objektivtest/open_test/telekonverter/overview.php

I am one of those people. I did some testing of 1.4 Kenko and Canon II before buying one and could not see any difference in IQ and sharpness. Plus Kenko fits most lenses (if not all) while Canon does not.

Another happy Kenko owner. I have Canon 1.4II & Kenko2x. Wioth the Kenko 2x I found virtually no difference at all on a 300 f2.8. On testing at my local dealer & viewing on their computer equipment that most only dream of we came to the conclusion that I should retain my $700 which paid for 5 days in Bali-flights included..

Nov 14, 2012 at 12:18 AM

StarNut
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · anyone had experience with 1.4x or 2x teleconverter for EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

thomashammer78 wrote:
So, you sholdnt really aim for any higher that the 1.4 from what I can gather from all of you, it ends up losing quality compared to what you actually aim to get...

in other words... get a real telelens if thats what I need

For those times when I may want 400mm of focal length, but don't want to lug my 500/4 around, I find the 2xIII with the 70-200 IS II to be a fine compromise.

JMO

Nov 14, 2012 at 05:34 PM

end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell end